Posted on 12/09/2007 2:02:37 PM PST by Paul_B
I still remember where I was when I heard that the student who committed the Virginia Tech massacre had released a press packet including a video, a manifesto and photos of himself holding various weapons.
I was just leaving a TV studio (having spoken about something else). Bursting with anger, I asked one of the producers if I could use his computer and posted on the web an urgent plea to NBC News (the organization that had first received the packet): "Don't publish it!"
They did, of course. And so did every other news outlet. The killer's picture, his disordered thoughts and his resentments were aired for days and weeks.
The same dangerous pattern has been repeated again and again. The disturbed man who took hostages at Sen. Clinton's headquarters in New Hampshire told loved ones to "watch the news tonight."
The shooter who terrorized an Omaha shopping mall by mowing down total strangers has achieved his goal. He left a suicide note in which he predicted "at least now I'll be famous." ...
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
p.
The temple of Artemis at Ephesus was destroyed on July 21, 356 BC in an act of arson committed by Herostratus. According to the story, his motivation was fame at any cost, thus the term herostratic fame.
A man was found to plan the burning of the temple of Ephesian Diana so that through the destruction of this most beautiful building his name might be spread through the whole world. Valerius Maximus, VIII.14.ext.5
The Ephesians, outraged, announced that Herostratus' name never be recorded. Strabo later noted the name, which is how we know it today.
Good luck. If the MSM could find a way to have a plane crash and a school/mall shooting every day they would do it. They love blood and destruction and do what they can to promote it.
Even if the cops ultimately determine these CO shootings are “not related,” I would put money on it that the second one was a copycat of the first.
The media doesn’t want to hear it. I remember a young radio talk show host who was trying to gain audience (a local show) with a question about whether the availability of guns contributed to school shootings.
I called and said, no, it was the media that was much more responsible.. and he was literally struck dumb for a few seconds. The panic in his voice as he responded was very heartening, as was the number of calls after that which agreed with me.
Same should go for Hollywood people and those that prosecute them. It’s disgusting to see the cops and prosecutors playing for book and movie deals when they’re involved in a major celebrity case.
The most egregious were Chris Darden and Marcia Clark. The O.J. murder case never should’ve made them famous. Cameras in the courtroom should only belong to the court, they should only be used to make an official record of the proceedings, and should only be released after the trial is done. Seeing O.J. and Michael Jackson, among others, turn the entire judicial system into a circus is disgusting and corrupts the entire process.
Criminals shouldn’t be able to profit from their crimes or become famous off them. I submit that cops, prosecutors, and other govt. officials shouldn’t, either. It’s a job, not an audition.
In our society, the MSM has raised the value of fame to an all time high. I always saw fame as more of a detriment than a positive. People who are truly famous have no privacy. It becomes difficult for them to do the most common things. The practical value of fame seems to be very limited.
No doubt, all you have to do is tune into your local 6 o’clock news. 90% of what they report is fires, murders, horrible car accidents, industrial accidents, and crimes involving drugs or serious violence. 9.9% is their slant on politics (with only one viewpoint: anything liberal/socialist/communist is wonderful, anything conservative is horrible and evil). Once a week, they’ll do a 2-minute slot on a feel-good story if they can turn away long enough from death, dismemberment, and getting their favorite DemonRat elected.
The is something undeniably wrong with someone who sympathizes or even admires the Omaha Mall Murderer. If you can look at him and listen and not feel revulsion and disgust, you are either enabling evil or prone to participation in evil.
Fascination with evil is nothing new, look at Jack the Ripper. Dreaming to be as famous as he was, is something else entirely. It is the hunger for fame above all else that is vile. I can't really get my head around the desire for fame at any cost, even that of being remembered as a Lizzie Borden.
I understand your point, but I think you are missing the bigger one.
Without viewership/readership, media outlets fail. These killer would not get air time and print space if the public didn’t want it. But the public DOES want it.
We want the details when notorious things happen. Look at the length of such threads here on FR.
The media responds to public demand. We don’t have to watch it or read it if we don’t approve, but we do.
Just something to think about.
Just as long, then, as “we” know that “we” are contributing to the epidemic of killing.
At some point one would hope that “we” would consider what’s going on and make the command decision to limit our intake of unnecessary salacious details for the sake of the innocent. Hopefully that’s not too much to ask for.
Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farakhan, all completely “media made” men.
Reginald Denny got a cinder block on the face thanks to the media and Rodney King.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Absolutely. Sounds good to me.
I assume that your quotation marks around the word “we” was meant to be sarcastic, but I was serious. Viewers, i.e. “we,” bear responsibility for driving the market.
As for me, I’m an experienced turner-offer. When I find something offensive, I flip the channel, cut power, or refuse to read it.
My suggestion is that you and others here do the same instead of expecting censors to protect you.
The quotes were perhaps a little sarcastic, but mostly were to point to the fact that everyone has an easy way to blame the situation on others.
I also am a tuned-out one, having had a TV for only a composite one year out of 25.
As for my calling for censorship in this matter, maybe you would show me where I did so.
News channels love “chaos”.
Advertisers have taken to using “shock” tactics too.
They want to get your attention.
It is unhealthy to live a world exclusively filled with exploitive muck.
If it bleeds it leads.
Reading the day’s news exclusively from the police blotter does nothing to inform you as to what “happened” today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.